[antlr-interest] Release naming convention?

[C. Mundi]

Thanks.  I eventually realized that clearly stating versions in
documentation is only as valuable as my ability to disambiguate builds.  :)

Although I have not studied your build process for ANTLR in detail, it's
evidently highly automated and might lend itself to automagical build
numbering.  Just a thought.

I have to say, this thing is way cool.  It's easy to see why you've been
jazzed about it for so long.  This so blows away yacc/bison.  Thank you for
that, too.

Thanks,
CM


On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 9:11 AM, Terence Parr <parrt at cs.usfca.edu> wrote:

>
> On May 14, 2008, at 6:02 PM, C. Mundi wrote:
>
>> The output of java org.antlr.Tool states 3.1b1.
>>
>> So would I be correct to infer that what I have is 3.1b1 + changes since
>> 3.1b1 ?
>>
>
> well, 3.1b1 is me being lazy.  it will be the first formal beta release
> sometime this week.
>
> Ter
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.antlr.org/pipermail/antlr-interest/attachments/20080515/82aeead2/attachment.html